guys! which format do you prefer your files are saved? MP3 or AAC? i read on a magazine that AACs sound better than MP3s even when more compressed?! what do you guys think? i just need comments to back up what i've read. Thanks! [email protected]
personally, I use AAC, Since I use it in my iPod only. But if you plan to use it for your other music devices then use MP3. It has almost the same quality (not an audiophile).
If you use an iPod, 128 kbps AAC should be good enough for all but critical listeners, specially if you will be using the supplied earbuds. The only reason to use MP3 format is for compatibility with other devices like CD players, DVD players, other portable music devices. I rip my CDs using at least 192 kbps AAC.
Windows-formatted iPods can use AAC. You can also ask your Windows-using friends to use iTunes for Windows so that both you and they can use the better AAC format. [Edited on 12-19-2004 by maitani]
iTunes does not have an MP3 converter so there is no use using that format if the iPod is your primary music device. Also I did read somewhere that AACs are of better quality than MP3.
iTunes can convert Mp3s to AAC, Wav, Apple Lossless, and AIFF. But you should just re-encode to AAC from the original CD instead, if ever.
I always rip my CDs in MP3 at 320kbps. For me its the simplest, most compatible way of getting that CD quality sound from my iPod and to my CD/DVD players when I burn it on CDRs.
Hi. I'm new to Philmug but I've been a Mac user ever since. I also know a lot about iTunes and the iPod (started with with the first gen). Sorry, but I need to correct you cyberprince. I'll attach an image to this message to show that iTunes indeed has an MP3 encoder, and it's not called a converter. i dug through the previous threads, ms. poink is right, this has been discussed before and that old thread is already very informative. Personally, I use AAC, better sound over MP3 despite higher compression. But i sometimes use Apple Lossless, if the album I'm ripping is worth the extra space on my HD. jorweeck, what you said is considered piracy. You're not supposed to 'share' music, especially not with windows-users! /jonny
Soundwise, nothing beats Lossless. Drawback is these files are HUGE. AAC @ 320kbps is a good compromise. As a non-audiophile I really don't notice much of a difference. I tend to just listen to music with my iPod or my MacBook speakers. I imagine if you are using some pretty good home theater sound equipment, perhaps you might perceive a difference. Until I can afford to check it out for myself...
imo, if youre only using it on your ipod or any other pmp, above 256kbps is already overkill. especially if youre only using stock earbuds! i would advise upgrading your earphones first, and then probably get a lineout/amp (since the internal amp of the ipod sucks) and then you can worry about using higher compression rates or lossless
AAC! it could probably just be me. but they sound better than my mp3s...never really got the chance to compare the two at the same bitrate though. i rip my cds using AAC 256 kbps VBR as well.
Yes, 'sharing' your MP3s or AACs is considered piracy, regardless of platform. Please do not make it a religion by differentiating between Windows and Mac users. No one is more right than the other. Btw, I'm a Mac user too. I hate Windows but i don't segregate people by the OS that they use. Peace! Anyway, AAC is way better than MP3. Depends on the factors that matter to you.
NOT TRUE. iTunes can convert AAC (or any other iTunes-readable format) to MP3. All you need to do is change Preferences/Advanced/Importing to any MP3 setting, and voila, when you have an AAC tune to convert, click on Advanced in the iTunes menu bar and it says right there -"Convert to MP3'.
I use AAC as well, eversince I started to use iTunes. I usually rip my CDs 256kbps or 320kbps if its my favorite songs.